1 |
On 1/20/08, Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
2 |
> Daniel Butzu wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > On 1/19/08, Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> >> For the record: I'd still like drobbins involved, but I don't think his |
7 |
> >> terms were at all reasonable, and the way he went about it was |
8 |
> >> reprehensible imo. It was designed to cause the furore it did, and only |
9 |
> >> makes me give credence to the argument that much of the negative press on |
10 |
> >> distrowatch has come from an associate of his. It was a totally political |
11 |
> >> move, and not at all motivated by concern for Gentoo afaic. If he cared |
12 |
> >> that much, he'd have approached Mr Goodyear privately or on the nfp list |
13 |
> >> if he wanted to be "open". Not put everyone through all this stress. |
14 |
> >> |
15 |
> > Maybe. However, since it caused the furore it did it seems that a lot |
16 |
> > of users were unsatisfied. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> >> Users used to feel just as excluded when drobbins was in charge |
19 |
> There appears to be some myth going round that everything was sweetness and |
20 |
> light back in those days; it's not true, and further the distro was an |
21 |
> absolute pig to maintain: |
22 |
> <long time user> "I used Gentoo when it was version 0.7, which was omg |
23 |
> broken. Packages were added to portage and this would be stable, that would |
24 |
> not compile at all. Then you had to re-sync to compile it, so in a day, you |
25 |
> would need to re-sync portage 3 or 4 times to get everything to compile. :P |
26 |
> ..Even still back in the 1.4 days, people really had no idea what to do." |
27 |
> |
28 |
> > You can't stir up something when there is nothing to stir up. |
29 |
> |
30 |
> Actually I think this whole drama shows that you can, or at least you can |
31 |
> draw attention to one thing (lack of paperwork) and pretend it means |
32 |
> something else (Gentoo is dying! Again!) People like drama. |
33 |
> |
34 |
> > So maybe we should focus more on our problems today, since we were unable |
35 |
> > of doing it yesterday. |
36 |
> |
37 |
> Er yeah, maybe you'd like to discuss those then? That was what the rest of |
38 |
> my mail was about. |
39 |
> |
40 |
> >> I've openly stated that I think user involvement and conduct on the dev |
41 |
> >> m-l are the biggest problems I see. |
42 |
> |
43 |
> As in, how do we constructively change those? Or do you believe that can |
44 |
> only be done by drobbins taking exclusive ownership of everyone's code? |
45 |
> |
46 |
> |
47 |
> |
48 |
> -- |
49 |
> gentoo-project@l.g.o mailing list |
50 |
> |
51 |
> |
52 |
|
53 |
I think there is something wrong with your knode since it is putting |
54 |
into my mouth some words that I didn't say. When writing a mixed reply |
55 |
is not enough to mention the name of only one initial sender. |
56 |
-- |
57 |
gentoo-project@l.g.o mailing list |